The Gazette 1967/71

easily be adapted to suit changing circum stances. 2. The present system of apprenticeship is un satisfactory. 3. The Council are not satisfied with the quality of instructions given in the University Law Schools. 4. The professional bodies should have repre sentation on the governing bodies of the University, having regard to the fact that solicitor's apprentices and law students at tend the University schools for part of their academic legal education. The Society's memorandum went on to sug gest that the whole system of legal education should be prescribed, not by statute, but by statu tory regulations to 'be made by the professional bodies with the concurrence of the President of the High Court, and it went on to indicate the kind of system which might be adopted by regulation if the necessary enabling legislation is passed. As far as solicitors' apprentices are concerned the present apprenticeship system which has been handed down, almost unchanged from the eigh teenth century, should be brought into line with modern requirements. Every person seeking admis sion as a solicitor's apprentice should be required to have already graduated in Law or Arts at a recognised University. A student graduating in Law would be permitted to present himself for the Society's lectures and examinations in most of the subjects, except possibly practice and procedure, before entering into indentures of apprenticeship. Having attended lectures and passed the Society's examinations his apprenticeship period would be whole time devoted to practical work, free from the worries and distractions of lectures and exa minations. The Council proposed that the appren tice should be required to work as an ordinary member of the staff and that he should be in a position to earn a salary. Having regard to the fact that the apprentice would have already gra duated at the University and have passed most of the Society's examinations he might be admitted to practice after a shortened apprenticeship of about two years. The Society further proposes that a common system of education for the Bar and the solicitor's profession should be adopted. This proposal has been forwarded to the Honourable Society of Kings Inns. I should add that the Society's proposals are dealt with fairly fully in the full report of the Commission on Higher

Education recently published. This report endor ses most of the Society's recommendations and will be the basis for further discussions both with the Department and with the Kings Inns. My remarks are merely a summary of the pro posals in the Society's memorandum and in the report of the Commission. I mention the matter with a view to removing any misapprehension which would lead members to think, either that the Society has not been continuously interested in this subject, or has not made any practical sug gestions with a view to the improvement of the system. I wish merely to add one remark, and that is, that as our system is regulated by statute, chan ges cannot be made without amending legislation. When the Solicitors' Bill 1954 was under con sideration, the Society proposed to the Depart ment of Justice that every solicitor should obtain a University degree in Law and Arts before ad mission. At that time the Government refused to accede to the proposal. We hope that in view of the report of the Commission on Higher Educa tion more enlightened views may prevail. Public Relations I trust thhat you will forgive me in prefacing my remarks on this subject by the observation that although I am, as most of you know, actively en gaged in politics, my attitude towards public con troversies or discussion in which the Society may become involved are motivated solely by the con sideration of the interests of our profession and its clients, and not by any party political viewpoint. The Society has never engaged in politics. Its membership includes solicitors of every political party, and of none and it would be improper and impermissible for the Society, its President or officers to take part in political controversies when speaking in their official capacity. Several matters of this kind engaged the attention of the Council during the year and I now refer to them only briefly in passing. On the subject of the now famous Marts Billl, the Society issued a statment drawing attention to provisions in the Bill which vested in the Minister for Agriculture the right to issue or refuse to issue a licence to carry on a livestock mart. The Council took the view that this jurisdiction should be vested in the District Court and not in the Minister. The principle of licensing is a sound one, but they regard the Bill, which has since become law, as the Livestock 65